[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] REST MAINTAINERS feedback requested Was:Re: [PATCH v5 01/28] HYPERCALL_version_op. New hypercall mirroring XENVER_ but sane.
- To: <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>,<Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:59:49 -0600
- Cc: wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx, stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx, mpohlack@xxxxxxxxx, ross.lagerwall@xxxxxxxxxx, julien.grall@xxxxxxx, stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx, sasha.levin@xxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, keir@xxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 16:00:04 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
>>> George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> 04/14/16 5:16 PM >>>
>On the other hand, I think there's a bit of a faulty interpretation of
>the procedure here. Jan reviewed the patch thoroughly and then acked
>it; on the basis of that, Konrad legitimately checked it in. After it
>was checked in Jan said, "I've changed my mind and withdraw my Ack";
>and the assumption of the subsequent conversation was that an ack
>*can* be withdrawn after it has been legitimately checked in, and that
>if no other Ack is supplied, then it must be reverted.
>
>I don't think that's a correct interpretation of the rules. Reviewers
>in general, and maintainers in particular, should make reasonably sure
>that they mean the Ack before they give it; and if they change their
>mind after it has been legitimately checked in, then it's now up to
>them to make the change they want to see according to the regular
>procedure. That is, if Jan wants it reverted, he needs to post a
>patch reverting it and get Acks from the appropriate maintainers; and
>the discussion needs to be around Jan's reversion being accepted, not
>about Konrad's original patch continuing to be accepted. (Obvious
>exceptions can be made in the case of emergencies like build
>breakages.)
Fundamentally I agree, but I think there's more to this than just following
a set of rules. For example, please don't forget the time pressure due to
the (at that time) rapidly approaching freeze date. And then, mistakes
happen, and so I made a mistake here by sending the ack a few hours too
early.
What is really hard to understand to me is why it is so difficult to just
get a refereeing opinion on the actual interface change. IMO we don't
really need to discuss rules and processes, the question is as simple
as "Do we want/need this new interface?"
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
